Saturday, December 20, 2014

Defense of the Gold Standard & the Discovery of Freedom, pt 1 of 7

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm an independent libertarian influenced by the seminal work of Rose Wilder Lane. I have no interest in Ayn Rand's philosophies, and little interest in the Civil War era other than to mourn the what-could-have-beens if Reconstruction had been allowed to run its natural course, instead of being shut down and replaced with jim crow.

Jackals Home - Thass fine, I'l take your Social security checks when you get them. Wouldn't wanna get any socializm on ya.

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't subscribe to any extreme political -isms, and prefer an eclectic mix of what will work better for us all. I lean towards Rose Wilder Lane's libertarian ideal as the foundation for such an eclectic model.

Jackals Home - "I...prefer an eclectic mix of what will work better for us all."

That is the exact opposite of Libertarianism.

Muhammad Rasheed - I reject the capital "L" Libertarianism with it's stench of Tea Party goo all over it. RWL was significantly more sensible, and compassionate.

Jackals Home - RWL was more compassionate than Rand, which is the faintest of praise. She was a bitter crank who retreated into a philosophical echo chamber, eventually alienating all but her most strident friends, who described her as "floating between sanity and a bedlam of hates."

As role models go, you're better off with virtually anyone else.

Compassion is antithetical to the libertarian (big or little 'L') mindset. You can increase or reduce the lengths of the lines, but you cannot make a triangle with more than three sides.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jackals Home wrote: "She was a bitter crank who retreated into a philosophical echo chamber..."

She became like that over the years, but it was related to life not turning out the way she thought it would, like a lot of intellectual folk get. It's almost a cliche, like Sean Connery's character in Finding Forrester.

Jeremy Travis - Tell me, Momo, how does she define 'libertarianism' and how does it differ from the Tea Party's 'Libertarianism'?

Muhammad Rasheed - The Libertarian Party itself is an uncompromising extremist political system that clearly wouldn't work in a country of the USA's size and diversity. The Tea Party's version of it uses a lot of Libertarian talking points, but it's members don't want any of the stuff the actual party are devoted to, because they are into free entitlements just as much as the folk they condemn. They would be the first to complain if their welfare checks stopped. They're just a knee-jerk group that formed over the FOX NEWS' relentless anti-Obama fear campaign.

Rose Wilder Lane's libertarianism is when the individuals in a society recognize that they are individually free, and determine the state of their happiness and comforts independently of any outside force. Sovereign without citizens. Absolute monarchy over yourself and your own actions. This attitude encourages a solutions driven/make it happen mindset, and when all or the majority of responsible adults in the society think that way, it led directly to the unprecedented civilizational progress of the last few centuries. Why weren't human's enjoying all of the present comforts before that, even though all the same individual human energy and resources were available then as now? The mindset alone is what changed things... are YOU responsible for your happiness, or the outside force of authority that you allow yourself to be led by? Her ideal government is set up by those same free individuals, and is designed to protect that mindset, and guard the country from all of those same failed Old World governmental systems the human race has tried and revolted against, tried and revolted against, over and over again.

One of the components of this free mindset is to truly believe all men are equal, and human kind is one brotherhood, that we need each other in order to be at our best. Her book The Discovery of Freedom, although important to the over-all Libertarian rhetoric, wasn't as popular as the rest because, way back in the 1940s when it was writ, she didn't believe in racism, or superiority of one group over another based on trivialities. The 1940s society wasn't ready for that level of enlightenment, and although popular in a limited way, her ideas didn't get legs until people started sampling the more... politically correct for its time... segments and publishing them separately without all the hard to swallow "all the races are equal" stuff.

Rob Leigh - I'm going to have a hard time fitting all that on a bumper sticker.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Jeremy Travis - OK, so how does this work? How is it implemented in a society?

Jackals Home - It's not, because fanciful notions of sovereign citizens don't put down asphalt or plant crops, make it happen mindsets don't care for the elderly or ill, and individual human energy doesn't make the majority of adults act responsibly. Claptrap fantasy for those too emotionally stunted to play D&D.

Jeremy Travis - PENCIL & PAPER RPGs FTW!

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy Travis wrote: "OK, so how does this work? How is it implemented in a society?"

When people are free they are solutions driven and find ways to make what they need and want happen. When people who are like that are together in a nation they control through their own individual efforts, they are held back by nothing, and a civilization of progress is the result. By contrast, societies in which people do not believe they are free wait for their figure of Authority to direct them, save them, provide solutions, etc., and they remain stagnant until they have a revolution, replace that authority with another one just like it and repeat.

They're not 'fanciful notions.' The make it happen mindset is exactly what directs human energy towards discovering and applying those things. All things being equal physically between two people, it's the one that doesn't feel held back... who believes he can and should do it... that directs his will towards that effort. That's not 'fanciful' that's reality.

Jackals Home wrote: "...make it happen mindsets don't care for the elderly or ill..."

Of course they do. That's exactly the mindset needed to care for them. The opposite mindset of victim behavior (blaming others, waiting for the authority to DO something, I just can't) is what will have them freeze to death, or hide them in the basement. It takes the free man to find a solution because he knows if he doesn't figure it out it won't get done. Period.

Individual human energy is only controlled by the individual that generates it. When he does so as directed from the free mindset, and adds that energy to the individual energy of like minded free men, progress happens. Sometimes they will need to pull together and defend themselves from other adults who are offended that they are behaving as if they are not under authority.

Jackals Home wrote: "Claptrap fantasy for those too emotionally stunted to play D&D."

It's not fantasy at all. It's life. It's history.

Gerald Welch - Mo, I couldn't have worded that better myself.

Jeremy Travis - Where in history or in nature has this phenomenon been observed?

Muhammad Rasheed - In America. That's why we enjoy what we have today. And during the Islamic Golden Age.

Jeremy Travis - What is the role of government in a libertarian society? What are its duties and responsibilities, what should not be its duties and responsibilities; why, why not?

Muhammad Rasheed - The duty of the gov is to enforce the law. When someone violates the rights of another, it is the gov that applies the force of punishment. The gov also keeps the society safe from hostile threats, either foreign or domestic. So it should defend against enemies from outsiders, as well as defend against dedicated forces that seek to harm its citizens from within.

The gov should not restrict freedoms of the citizens. If it does, the people will forget they are free, and look to the gov itself as the authority figure that will do and fix and solve, and the society will start on the road towards revolution again.

Jeremy Travis - For what are laws put into place in a libertarian society?

Muhammad Rasheed - Say again?

Jackals Home - The gov should not restrict the freedoms of citizens to store volatile chemicals in whatever quantity they desire:

Muhammad Rasheed - Jackals Home wrote: "The gov certainly shouldn't restrict the freedoms for children to get out there and explore a nice productive place in society"

The gov's job is to protect the people. It should be against the law to abuse children and/or traffic in persons.

Jackals Home - I don't know how all this progress is going to happen 'like we used to have in America' with all these nanny state rules you're suddenly okay with. You know what this reminds me of? When you tried to drill a hole in your head, remember that?

Jeremy Travis - Momo, what are laws for if everyone is free?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jackals Home wrote: "I don't know how all this progress is going to happen 'like we used to have in America'"

The technological advancements in society that enable people to get enough to eat, and take luxurious comforts like a/c for granted is the progress I'm talking about. The species spent the last 6,000 years in a dark age by comparison, if you believe the mainstream history texts account. Jeremy asked me what does the 'free mindset' concept look like in practicality. It looks like what we have. During the Golden Age of Islam people had glass windows and private baths and other tech made possible by innovative individuals who also knew they were free.

Jackals Home wrote: "...with all these nanny state rules you're suddenly okay with."

lol Jeremy asked me what is the role of gov in the libertarian society. The answer is to protect the people. It's also to protect the people's rights. I don't understand how laws that protect the people in it's most basic form... protect the children from harm, protect people from a chemical fire blowing up the neighborhood... would be considered a 'nanny state.' When a problem is identified, obviously you amend the law to solve that problem.

Jackals Home wrote: "You know what this reminds me of? When you tried to drill a hole in your head, remember that?"

Noooo... (maybe that was chris pepe...?) lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy Travis wrote: "Momo, what are laws for if everyone is free?"

Laws are there to protect that very freedom. In every society there is a small percentage of people who are in the role of dedicated social predator... the criminal. They will always be among us. The criminal opportunist. It should be against the law to encroach upon the rights of your fellow citizen, his right to life, the right to pursue his happiness, to own property, to be safe, etc. You are free to do whatever you wish, except trespass upon the freedoms of another.

Jeremy Travis - Isn't that what our laws do now?

Muhammad Rasheed - Sure, a lot of what we have now comes from the whole "America, Home of the Free!" mindset.

Jeremy Travis - So where's the disconnect?

Muhammad Rasheed - Remember that speech from the president, where he asked the American people to "tell me what to do?" That the people themselves were more powerful than the powers of Washington because those powers served the people? He was reminding them that they were free.

Of course they didn't take him up on it. They continued to wait for the government to fix things for them as the authority figure that controlled them. So without any specific directives from the people themselves, the president went to work behaving like the authority figure... putting in place the things that he personally felt they needed, while they complained about it. That's the nature of the disconnect in action. The citizens of the USA have forgotten they were free, and they are now ready to overthrow the government, even though it is designed to operate for the free.

Muhammad Rasheed - I think it was taken from them... manipulated from them by the classic Red Menace that Senator McCarthy and his team were fighting against... and lost. Over the next few generations the American people were indoctrinated with communism, and our freedom was stolen by indoctrination.

Jeremy Travis - What then should they have told him?

Muhammad Rasheed - Whatever they needed... state by state. Whatever their lists of grievances were. I have MINE. Whatever was in his power that he could've done, they should've given him a task list. If they were uninterested in the to-do list he brought with him from his campaign, then make another one for him. For the gov itself. MAKE them do it. Whatever.

Muhammad Rasheed - They obey YOU. That's what he was pleading in that speech. TELL ME WHAT TO DO.

Muhammad Rasheed - "Tell me your woes!"

Jeremy Travis - People want jobs that respect them and to not be bullied by corporations that exploit them at every turn. They want to be bailed out of jams that they were tricked into instead of bailing out the tricksters. What then?

Muhammad Rasheed - What then? Then they have to turn their energy towards fighting to get those things. With a sense of urgency and force of will.

And it may have to look like war to get it. We'll have to take our country back.

Al Bush - That kind of freedom linked with free market capitalism leads quickly to winner take all. All the autonomy in the world is insufficient if you're badly outgunned, wealth is accumulated generationally, and the size of government capable of restricting the sociopath is insufficient for the job which is the mindset of the free marketeer.

Muhammad Rasheed - Give me some illustrated examples.

Muhammad Rasheed - Weave some for instance scenarios.

Al Bush - The h\recent history of Monsanto and GMO crops comes to mind first, The great banking families, now corporate enterprises that have devastated the bottom third of the countries accumulated wealth. Especially AA neighborhoods in cities across the country hard hit in the recession by loss of wealth in home equity. But poor people of any color. The HC debacle which is truly outside the autonomous control of anyone, outside the range of working families all over the country, even with subsidies. I'm trying to think of a major sector of the economy that doesn't suffer and would suffer far worse if left in the hands of free marketeers. The reason e have a mixed economy is to off set the disruptions and sociopathic greed of freemarket capitalism. When the labor force is respected as much as other sectors of infrastructure the calculation changes. Unfortunately -- money talks- not new, eh?

The free market works perfectly when left alone. It's the gov's efforts to fix the free market that causes the extreme wealth disparities, that actually make the problem worse.

Muhammad Rasheed - "To understand the effects of price control, it is necessary to understand how prices rise and fall in a free market. There is nothing esoteric about it, but it is important to be very clear about what happens. Prices rise because the amount demanded exceeds the amount supplied at existing prices. Prices fall because the amount supplied exceeds the amount demanded at existing prices. The first case is called a 'shortage' and the second is called a 'surplus' - but both depend on existing prices. Simple as this might seem, it is often misunderstood, sometimes with disastrous consequences." ~Thomas Sowell

Muhammad Rasheed - The disastrous results are the consequence of tampering with the free market, by not allowing it to do its thing. The difference between wealth and poverty is the ability to take advantage of a profitable opportunity the second it reveals itself, generally because of having ready cash at hand or sufficient credit to function as the same. So when a lobbyist who is actually working for wealthy special interests convinces normally economically ignorant politicians to fix a community’s housing prices “so that the poor will be able to afford to live there,” it’s a clear bullshit psych job to anyone else with half a brain. The wealthy immediately buy up all the housing and hold onto it for generations, and the prices stay low forever because of the gov tampering. The rich aren’t going to rent those places out to the poor, and the price fixes discourage any new building in the area because there is now no profit in doing so.

This is a typical example of what happens when the free market is tampered with. It’s the 1% that tampers with it for their own benefit... they’re the only ones who understand how those economic systems really work because it’s their job to know. They’re the money makers. So they routinely spin the money-ignorant, academic Intellectual class who’s very wrong idea of how the markets work was intentionally skewed by the enemy.

The 1% HATES the idea of a true free market because it WOULD completely level the playing field. Monopolies and cartels… the favored weapon of the 1%... are the traditional enemy of the free market.

Stop listening to those slimy fuckers!

Al Bush - Illustrate a few examples for me please.

Jeremy Travis - Yeah, illustrate* some examples, ya jerk!

* - Do not DRAW the examples

Muhammad Rasheed - lol I don't have time to draw some anyway, even though I think it's a great idea after reading Al's Scooped post. I'm going to put that in my queue.

The housing market post above is a real world example and reflects the current housing market status in New York and San Francisco. There's no new housing growth because the price fixing had the literal exact result than what the liberal politicians thought would happen. But of course the finance savvy Republicans and their greedy friends knew EXACTLY what was going to happen when those prices got fixed, and they had those property owners on speed dial for the very second the laws passed, believe that.

Jeremy Travis - So what is wrong with the way this government does things as opposed to the libertarian method? What's your position on public services such as police, firefighters, public education, universal healthcare, the EPA, etc?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy Travis wrote: "So what is wrong with the way this government does things as opposed to the libertarian method?"

The government is in bed with [corporate] special interests and do a lot of things that work against the people because of it. For starters we shouldn't be empire building, we shouldn't be giving free money to mega-corps, and we should[n't] be on a fiat money system in partnership with private special interests. All of our problems as a nation are hinged upon that basic concept.

Jeremy Travis wrote: "What's your position on public services such as police, firefighters..."

The gov's number one job is to protect the people. These two are fundamental.

Jeremy Travis wrote: "...public education..."

I'm all for it as long as it is Top Quality education in areas people genuinely need to succeed in life at the highest levels. As the number one 1st World Nation we should be kicking ass in that area.

Jeremy Travis wrote: "...universal healthcare..."

I'm not sure about this. I haven't read up on it or explored the topic at all. Should "healing" be considered a basic human right, and be provided to all citizens and we all just pay a general "healing tax" into a pot? The gov's relationship with Big Medicine doesn't seem to be ideal. The gov needs to be held accountable towards keeping us safe, and I don't see how they will be able to do that if they are in a position to take bribes and stuff. Big Pharm doesn't have enough fire up their butt to work the bugs out of the chemicals before they are given to the public, for example.

Jeremy Travis wrote: "...the EPA..."

Already talked about that one with Jackals Home. Keeping the people safe is the gov's number one job.

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "The government is in bed with [corporate] special interests..."

I'm listening.

Muhammad wrote: "... we shouldn’t be on a fiat money system in partnership with private special interests. "

Wait! What??

And that's where it falls apart for me.

Muhammad wrote: "All of our problems as a nation are hinged upon that basic concept."

What problems are you talking about, Mo?

Abdur Rasheed - It sounds like you hate big government but love all the individual parts.

Muhammad Rasheed - Not "big government" as a talking point, but specific governmental sabotages. Those related to politician greed and corporate interests getting their way from being able to manipulate it.

Jeremy Travis - Why can we not trust the government and Big Pharma but we can trust the government and the Military-Industrial Complex?

Muhammad Rasheed - ???

Muhammad Rasheed - Are you creating a strawman for me? Explain.

Muhammad Rasheed - The government's force should be used to protect the rights of the citizens and keep them safe. There should be no empire building.

Jeremy Travis - It seems like part of the reason why you're not sold on universal health care is because you're distrustful of the relationship between government and the health care industry, why not be just as distrustful of the relationship between the government and the 'defense' industry? Why charge the government with protecting us from threats from other humans but not with protecting us from illness?

Abdur Rasheed - The economy is no longer hinged upon the Uniter States.

It USED to be when we had all of the manufacturing jobs and middle class dreams. We used to set the price for commodities, energy, and everything else around the world.

Today it's a global economy.

The economy is simply the flow of wealth.

It used to that we supplied cars and houses and all of the various businesses that support those industries and the money trickled outward.

Today companies outsource those jobs overseas to what are considered third world countries.

Now what used to be dirt poor people can afford shit for the first time In history.

India and China have a billion people each and over night they all can afford cars.

The People's republic of China can set the price for our shit high (A Chrysler will cost you about $300,000 in China) and their cars are dirt cheap.

A couple of billion people all need to fill up their gas tanks and the demand for gas goes up and does the price.

We no longer make any thing so our money is hinged on one bubble or the next depending on what the Wall Street traders are pushing. It leaves us vulnerable, but less thang they all started to push gold or unoptainium.

What do we actually make?

We should start there.

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Not "big government" as a talking point, but specific governmental sabotages. Those related to politician greed and corporate interests getting their way from being able to manipulate it."

Give me some examples. At least 2.

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "The free market works perfectly when left alone. It's the gov's efforts to fix the free market that causes the extreme wealth disparities, that actually make the problem worse."

The free market by itself is economic Darwinism and it shits on the poor.

Where is this perfect example you speak of?

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "Laws are there to protect that very freedom. In every society there is a small percentage of people who are in the role of dedicated social predator... the criminal. They will always be among us. The criminal opportunist. It should be against the law to encroach upon the rights of your fellow citizen, his right to life, the right to pursue his happiness, to own property, to be safe, etc. You are free to do whatever you wish, except trespass upon the freedoms of another."

If you were able to scrap this society and start a new libertarian utopia with limited regulations and government...its not the the criminal opportunist will rob you with a gun or break into your house who you have to worry about. Its the one who smiles in your face with the suit on and invents new ways to trick investors into giving their money away to people with variable rate mortgages and then take out billions of dollars in insurance hoping that people will not be able to pay them back and then make hundreds of billions.

Petty criminals didn't almost crash the world markets.

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "The economy is no longer hinged upon the Uniter States. What do we actually make? We should start there."

I would push for a world class education and all the tools realistically needed to get American students to the top of the heap in math, science, business, etc. The things we make will come directly from a high culture of imagination, science, the arts, and ingenuity in inventing/entrepreneurship.

2.) Our money system being controlled by private interests that profit off of a debt culture.

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "The free market by itself is economic Darwinism and it shits on the poor. Where is this perfect example you speak of?"

A text book example was that Papa John's article you posted the other day. Give me an example of the free market shitting on the poor.

Abdur Rasheed - The Great Depression was the last time the free market was allowed to go unchecked.

Abdur Rasheed - It shit on the poor pretty hard.

Abdur Rasheed - We should, but should we pay these young Americans?

Keep in mind we are competing with second generation dirt farmers from other countries and "wealthy" is $5 US an hour.

Muhammad Rasheed - The Great Depression was not the free market in action since it was the direct result of the US gov allowing a private banking interest a monopoly over our money that collapsed the economy. Monopolies and cartels are the literal opposite of the free market.

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "We should, but should we pay these young Americans?"

Those young Americans will BE the payers.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Keep mind we are competing with second generation dirt farmers from other countries and "wealthy" is $5 US an hour."

Is it a true competition when the government set minimum wage laws keep us from even being in the running?

Using your example of the foreign dirt farmer, how has the minimum wage law helped the American unskilled worker? The companies have a work around, you know? They can just hire the illegal immigrants… that both Demos & Repubs are soft on… and price the Americans with their precious higher waged Minimum Wage right out of the game. The higher Minimum Wage is cutting the American’s throat with yet another example of sabotaging the Free Market to our detriment.

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "How are THEY going to BE the payers?"

By being educated in business/valuable skills they will be the next captains of industry.

Abdur Rasheed - Do you realize that you are asking American workers to compete itch people in third world countries with NO infrastructure?

If we were still on the gold standard the value of the dollar would go farther, and by now one hundred years later, it would be more valuable than it was when we left off. Without the minimum wage laws we'd be able to compete with other unskilled workers and take a lower wage we could actually live off of.

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: " I could if I was still ON the gold standard."

[blinks]

And where do you think the value of gold comes from?

Muhammad Rasheed - Gold is universally trusted as a measure of wealth by every people throughout recorded history.

Abdur Rasheed - Yeah yeah...that's not what I asked you.

What sets the price of gold.

I know it's been shiny for a long time, but what gives it its value?

Muhammad Rasheed - The trust of the people and their willingness to accept it as a measure of wealth. As long as people are confident in it, they continue to use it for trade.

Muhammad Rasheed - When a currency is backed by gold it is stable because of that universally accepted aspect. Under the current fiat system, the USD is artificially given value by the global central banking systems, and why it's stability wavers.

Using your example of the foreign dirt farmer, how has the minimum wage law helped the American unskilled worker?"

It allows them to live in America.

Economies are not some tangible empire that is rock solid and stands the test of time for all eternity.

Economies are fluid.

At the US peak of manufacturing the American dream was a house a car and a nice bank account for every American.

We unionized and set standards for work weeks (40 hours) vacation, sick pay, wages instead of being at the mercy of the corporations.

NOW it's India's turn.

They are going to want shit and make standards of living for their own country.

Which empire in history never fell?

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "It allows them to live in America."

I get that being poor in America is a lot different than being poor some place where there isn't even any food to steal. But if your manufacturing plant fires you and hires the India worker because the gov insists that you cost too much to hire, then how did that help you? If the gov hadn't handed my money system over to the Federal Reserve, and set a minimum wage making unskilled American workers unemployable, how am I at an advantage in that context? If I starve to death in Flint, Michigan or in Bombay, India, I still starved to death.

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "The trust of the people and their willingness to accept it as a measure of wealth. As long as people are confident in it, they continue to use it for trade. When a currency is backed by gold it is stable because of that universally accepted aspect. When a currency is backed by gold it is stable because of that universally accepted aspect. Under the current fiat system, the USD is artificially given value by the global central banking systems, and why it's stability wavers."

Universally accepted means more dumb asses buy gold.

"Holly SHIT EVERYBODY! The economy is taking a shit! Quick...buy all the gold you can." -gold brokers

It went from $250 an ounce to damn near $2000 and ounce. As the Bush economy got worse the demand and the price went up.

As the Obama economy gets better the price will go back down. Now it's back down to $1200 and ounce and falling.

If you bought low and sold high and got the fuck out in time it will be no different than if you sold 50 rental properties in the early 2000's instead of holding on to them until they were worthless I

in 2008.

It's just another bubble.

The tech bubble, the housing bubble, the gold bubble.

They all pop eventually.

If you scrapped up money and bought gold at $1500 in 2011 because all of the gold brokers told you too...you lost your ass because its now worth $1200.

If you listened to the mortgage brokers and pulled all of the fake "equity" out of your house in 2001...you are probably sleeping in a box.

The US economy backing our money on the gold standard only means that we will print more money to artificially keep the price of gold high...for a time...until the bubble pops.

At the end of the day...even at the beginning of the day gold is still just a shiny rock.

Your economy books and your understanding on how the us economy works is out dated.

It's a GLOBAL economy now.

We have to start making shit that everybody can use.

Muhammad Rasheed - There were no inflation/recession/depression bubbles when we were on the gold standard. Inflation comes from printing money that isn't backed by anything, or printing more than what your reserves are worth. The gold standard means we only have as much money printed as represents gold in stores, meaning each dollar and cent represents a corresponding amount of gold. The $20 note (or coin) used to represent 20 troy ounces of gold. If you need more money in circulation, you go downwards... break the cents up into half cents, quarter cents, etc., so the value of the USD isn't watered down which is what inflation is.

I get that being poor in America is a lot different than being poor some place where there isn't even any food to steal. But if your manufacturing plant fires you and hires the India worker because the gov insists that you cost too much to hire, then how did that help you? If the gov hadn't handed my money system over to the Federal Reserve, and set a minimum wage making unskilled American workers unemployable, how am I at an advantage in that context? If I starve to death in Flint, Michigan or in Bombay, India, I still starved to death."

Who in the fuck said that they are unemployable?

Sure they are employable. Companies are in business to please their investors and maximize returns. They don't have to pay for clean air, and water, or proper hazardous waste disposal in China.

How long to you think that they can sustain living like that until they implement standards that are just as expensive as ours and the companies move on the next country?

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "It's just another bubble."

There will ALWAYS be another bubble under the current fiat system. It's specifically designed to do that. They create money from nothing, backed by nothing, and charge you interest on it. You go further in debt every time they give it to you, and they get wealthier and own all your shit. They had no power under the gold standard system. Under THIS system gold is just another commodity to be traded by Wall Street, but it is also still universally recognized as true wealth all over the world. Even the fed itself keeps a reserve of gold just in case the people decide to burn them down and they have to cut and run.

Muhammad Rasheed - We define 'bubble' very differently...

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Who in the fuck said that they are unemployable?"

The companies that prefer to buy cheaper labor elsewhere.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Sure they are employable."

I guess, if I can't afford the red tape needed to buy cheap immigrants or whatever...

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "How long to you think that they can sustain living like that until they implement standards that are just as expensive as ours and the companies move on the next country?"

Okay, but in the meantime the government said that unskilled American workers can't be hired for anything less than XYZ so the companies will guarantee to continue hopping around the globe for cheaper labor. The unskilled American laborer will have to get skilled, but for some reason when that is brought up, everybody gets mad like they are being cussed out.

Abdur Rasheed - I'm WELL aware.

This conversation is like the difference between the first Wall Street movie and the second one.

In the first one the worst thing that they could think of in the financial market was insider trading.

In the second one insider training was laughable it was so insignificant.

We should probably take this off line.

Muhammad Rasheed - ???

Muhammad Rasheed - Why?

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Who in the fuck said that they are unemployable? Sure they are employable."

By whom? If American companies have proven they'd prefer to hire foreign workers who are not subject to US minimum wage laws, then who are they employable by?

I can't watch this video over here; the army has YouTube blocked on my computer. What is the message on it? I hope it's not whether the US gov should keep us safe from corporate greed cutting corners and endangering the citizens because I already said how I felt about that twice. It's the gov's primary job to protect us from threats both foreign and domestic. What happened in West Virgina is unacceptable to me. That's an example of what "big government" looks like when it is the clear villain in the story. Why didn't the gov protect the citizens of WV from the corporations' domestic threat to their safety? Because certain politicians profited from the deal.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy Travis wrote: "It seems like part of the reason why you're not sold on universal health care is because you're distrustful of the relationship between government and the health care industry, why not be just as distrustful of the relationship between the government and the 'defense' industry? Why charge the government with protecting us from threats from other humans but not with protecting us from illness?"

You asked me before about what I thought the current gov did wrong compared to the way I feel it should be done. Being in bed with corporate special interests was my main answer. The current gov has a big problem with the whole "conflict of interest" thing, and politicians will set themselves up as sponsors to their pet favorite special interest groups. A mega-corporation will set their sights on a certain lithium rich nation (insert natural resource of your choice). They will have their friends in certain intelligence agencies write up a report saying that the lithium rich nation is up to no good. That report will go straight up the chain to the president. The president's top military advisers will be all up in his face: "We have to do something NOW, Mr. president!! This situation is VITAL! Weapons of mass destruction! Blah, blah, blah! Freedom!!" A crazy shitload of money is withdrawn out of the Fed ATM and the military advisers hand it over to the mega-corporation, who promptly starts marking Xs on everything they want the USMC to smash (oo-rah). Mega-corporation then plants their logo flag and the US flag on the land to protect the American people, and make sure to give their buddies in Washington DC their fee.

None of that had anything to do with protecting US citizens from harm, or protecting their rights. The gov was 100% out of line in aiding the corporations in their endeavors. In fact, it should be an act of treason to even suggest you need me to help you invade a nation for their lithium, because the blowback from that will have people angry as hell and will want to attack us out of revenge putting the American people in danger.

Jeremy Travis - I agree, but if you can separate the greed of the mega defense corporations from the need to protect US citizens then what stops you from separating the greed of mega pharmaceutical corpoartions from the need to keep US citizens healthy?

Muhammad Rasheed - Because creating medicine and the healing arts aren't the government's job. I don't think it's a good idea to delegate that to them. Let them enforce industry standards that will keep us safe, while someone else does it.

Jeremy Travis - The government doesn't have to create medicine so much as see to it that health care is accessible and affordable to all.

Muhammad Rasheed - Then they should have regulations that prevent monopolies from forming and let the free market work.

Jeremy Travis - OK, I get your 'Lil L' libertarianism, but how come you Lanians aren't confronting, or at least opposing, the Randians on their bullshit?

Muhammad Rasheed - For what?

Jeremy Travis - To present people with a better understanding of libertarianism, to offer a better alternative to the present-day governmental system, to actually DO something. The Tea Party is where it is because they decided to do something, that and they're backed by corporations, so what will you all be doing about it besides talking?

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't think there is a "you all."

Muhammad Rasheed - Every libertarian I've ever met favored Ayn Rand over RWL. I don't know what William Satterwhite thinks about all of it. I just know how I feel, and what I want for my family and country.

Jeremy Travis - Why do you think those people favored Rand over RWL?

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm sure I don't know.

Abdur Rasheed - If you have the last 100 bags of flour on earth what are they worth?

What if everybody on earth had 100 bags?

Gold has less usefulness than flour.

Silver is a better conductor.

If you have a set amount of gold and there for a set amount of value in your country's wealth you limit your growth.

You would never have had the middle class wealth booms in this country if we were limited by the amount of gold that we could dig out of the ground.

It was cool at the time when there were just over 100 million people in the United States.

We now have over triple and a half that in US population.

Gold would NEVER be able to support even the slightest economic up tick.

If we were on the gold standard the people's republic of China would be the most powerful country on the planet.

We wouldn't even be number 2.

The fact that a LOT of people assign an arbitrary value to a shiny rock is no reason to prop our economy up with it.

No more than the housing bubble.

You can't take a complicated topic with a billion different moving parts and just shrug and say, "Gold standard and we will be fine."

I can't watch this video over here; the army has YouTube blocked on my computer. What is the message on it? I hope it's not whether the US gov should keep us safe from corporate greed cutting corners and endangering the citizens because I already said how I felt about that twice. It's the gov's primary job to protect us from threats both foreign and domestic. What happened in West Virgina is unacceptable to me. That's an example of what "big government" looks like when it is the clear villain in the story. Why didn't the gov protect the citizens of WV from the corporations' domestic threat to their safety? Because certain politicians profited from the deal."

Ok. What should the government have done to prevent what happened?

Abdur Rasheed - Who's job is it to catch companies when they pollute?

Who reported the chemical company when they realized that the water was contaminated?

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "How long to you think that they can sustain living like that until they implement standards that are just as expensive as ours and the companies move on the next country?"

Okay, but in the meantime the government said that unskilled American workers can't be hired for anything less than XYZ so the companies will guarantee to continue hopping around the globe for cheaper labor. The unskilled American laborer will have to get skilled, but for some reason when that is brought up, everybody gets mad like they are being cussed out."

Everybody like WHO?

Who got mad when somebody started talking about American workers getting skilled??

Stop reading shit from these talking point shit heads!

If you want a job you can find a job.

Without skills or an education it will probably be a shitty job.

EVERYBODY knows that.

The minimum wage is lower than the poverty line.

So we should throw it out?

Because you are my brother I WON'T say how fucking stupid that is...but it's getting harder to contain my inner Rah.

Can YOU feed your family on $6 an hour or less?

What do you do while you are getting your "skill game tight?"

Starve? Hunt?

What is wrong with you?

Again you can't take a complex problem and just throw out a overly simplistic solution at it and think all of the problems will go away.

Gold has always been more valuable than silver. They're not even close. Silver being a better conductor doesn't mean that gold is worthless as a conductor. Gold is an excellent conductor, and it makes up for the difference by being corrosion resistant.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If you have a set amount of gold and there for a set amount of value in your country's wealth you limit your growth. You would never have had the middle class wealth booms in this country if we were limited by the amount of gold that we could dig out of the ground."

That's nonsense, and narrow-minded thinking. Currency wouldn't be limited to how much gold we have, when you can just divide the dollar up further. The Kuwaiti Dinar (KD) is the highest-valued currency in the world... everybody wants it! The KD is divided into a thousand parts (fils) as opposed to the USD's one hundred parts (cents). A 250/1000 of a KD is powerful. Using this money is what it was like living under the gold standard when the USD was still rock solid.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If we were on the gold standard the people's republic of China would be the most powerful country on the planet. We wouldn't even be number 2."

Was China on the gold standard the last time we were? We were number one in the world when we were.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "The fact that a LOT of people assign an arbitrary value to a shiny rock is no reason to prop our economy up with it."

What makes it arbitrary? At the moment you are the only human being in history that doesn't consider gold true wealth. Even the Federal Reserve, that believes in creating bubbles and recessions from producing money literally from thin air that you're such a big proponent of, has a stockpile of gold for their private company usage.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "No more than the housing bubble."

There wouldn't be any bubbles if we were on the gold standard. "Bubbles" are caused by printing money arbitrarily backed by nothing by the Fed saying "Okay, print some more just because" and inflation threatening to collapse the economy. You don't have an argument on this topic. You're just talking a lot.

Abdur Rasheed wrote: "You can't take a complicated topic with a billion different moving parts and just shrug and say, 'Gold standard and we will be fine.'"

Sure, I can. Because that's the fix. Under the gold standard our economy was rock solid. Off the gold standard we got the Great Depression in just 20 years later from the unchecked bubble that grew IMMEDIATELY.

About Me

"I see the world as a multi-layered, encrypted message—encrypted for countless reasons, by numerous sources. I believe our job as actively-engaged humans is to decode these messages for our own use and to document them for the greater body of human literature at the means each individual has at hand. As an artist—specifically, a cartoonist—that is the means/medium I use for my own decoding duties. Through my research, I use logic, reason and intellect to intuitively follow the knowledge thread that intrigues me, connecting the dots from pattern recognition, and producing the cartoons that form my socio-political analysis."